ENCINITAS GENERAL PLAN UPDATE HIT WITH TROUBLES

Video shown to City Council finds fault
with effort; city also cut loose consultant

A video recently released by a group of Encinitas residents accuses one of the key players in the city’s general plan update of violating the public trust.

The video, created and narrated by Andrew Audet, a frequent speaker at city meetings, alleged that Peder Norby, the man charged with consensus building for the 23-member Element Review Advisory Committee, had said members failed to agree on various elements of the general plan.

The document will steer development in Encinitas through 2035.

Clips from committee meetings showing all hands raised were contrasted with video from council meetings during which Norby told the council that the group couldn’t find common ground.

Audet urged the council to reject a contract renewal with Norby, a move that would leave the Element Review Advisory Committee without a leader.

Council members did not reply to the video right away. It’s likely they won’t reply at all.

“Nobody’s talking about doing anything,” said Mayor Jerome Stocks two days after the video aired in the council chambers late last month. “What (Audet) is doing is using very selectively edited snippets without showing the totality of the comments that were made.”

Stocks added that Norby sent a letter to council members the day after the video was shown. He defended himself against the attack and noted that any further videos or statements about his job as the leader of ERAC could be met with legal action.

The situation is the latest salvo in what has proved to be a tumultuous general plan update for the city. What was supposed to be a two-year outreach has been extended to through June and a company that had originally signed a $977,000 contract with the city — amendments to that contract brought the price past $1 million — has been taken off the project.

In August of 2009, Encinitas signed a contract with MIG, Inc., a planning and design company with offices in California, North Carolina, Oregon and Wisconsin. The company was to help the city reach out to residents for comments on where new businesses, shopping centers and affordable housing should go.

A year later, the company told the city it needed another $20,000 for contingencies related to those workshops and about $8,000 for other expenses. The cost to keep MIG on the books for work on the general plan update rose to about $1 million.

In March, the company again approached the city for another $20,000. The City Council decided then that the plans it had delivered weren’t acceptable. MIG’s proposal would have placed about 2,000 affordable housing units throughout the city. Most of those units were to be built in New Encinitas, an area residents said is already congested. Council members agreed with residents and denied MIG’s request for more money. The company was ultimately booted from the process it had overseen since 2009.

“I say not a penny more,” said Councilwoman Kristin Gaspar of MIG’s request. “In fact, I’d like a refund for the work that’s been done by MIG.”

Mayor Stocks called the plan an “ugly baby” and agreed to scrap the affordable housing element — arguably the most important part of a city’s general plan — altogether.

The do-over outreach meetings on affordable housing were held in April and various committees still have to reach consensus before the housing element can be submitted to the state for review.

City Attorney Glenn Sabine told the council that the state can force affordable housing on the city if the plans presented don’t meet California standards, which would set back the process again.

The housing element is the first hoop to jump through for general plans. An environmental impact report has to be completed after that, and the city is required to host a 60-day public review period of that document.

Public hearings on the general plan would then occur at the Planning Commission level. Another set of public hearings would be scheduled, this time before than City Council, before final approval of the massive document.